Effectiveness of local tenoxicam versus corticosteroid injection for plantar fasciitis treatment

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Injections versus Steroid Injections in the Management of Upper and Lower Extremity Orthopedic Conditions: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although corticosteroid injections are an effective treatment for musculoskeletal pathologies, they may not be suitable for all patients. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare clinical outcomes between patients who received NSAID and corticosteroid injections for various orthopedic conditions.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched, and meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model for outcomes presented in three or more studies. Other studies were qualitatively analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 28 articles with 2113 patients were included. A meta-analysis of five studies in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome demonstrated that there was no significant difference in the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) between subacromial NSAID injections and corticosteroid injections at 1 month [weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.244; 95% CI, -1.232 to 0.745; I2, 94.5%]. For patients with knee osteoarthritis, a meta-analysis of three studies demonstrated that there was no significant difference between intraarticular NSAID injections and corticosteroid injections in pain VAS at 1 month (WMD 0.754; 95% CI, -0.413 to 1.921; I2, 90.2%) and 3 months (WMD-0.089; 95% CI, -0.345 to 0.166; I2, 0%). A review of the studies assessing pain outcomes for hip osteoarthritis, adhesive capsulitis, and plantar fasciitis showed no significant differences between the NSAID and corticosteroid groups.

CONCLUSION

NSAID injections may be safe and effective alternatives to steroid injections, especially in shoulder impingement syndrome and knee osteoarthritis.

Effects of therapeutic interventions on pain due to plantar fasciitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of different therapeutic interventions that have ever been evaluated in randomized controlled trials on pain due to plantar fasciitis.

METHODS

We searched different electronic databases until September 2022. Mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to evaluate the overall certainty evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 236 studies met the study criteria, including 15,401 patients. Botulinum toxin MD -2.14 (CI: -4.15, -0.14), micronized dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane injection MD -3.31 (CI: -5.54, -1.08), dry needling MD -2.34 (CI: -4.64, -0.04), low-dye taping MD -3.60 (CI: -4.16, -3.03), low-level laser therapy MD -2.09 (CI: -2.28, -1.90), myofascial releases MD -1.79 (CI: -2.63, -0.94), platelet-rich plasma MD -2.40 (CI: -4.16, -0.63), radiofrequency MD -2.47 (CI: -4.65, -0.29), and stretching MD -1.14 (CI: -2.02, -0.26) resulted in being effective treatments for pain when compared to the control in the short term. In the medium and long term, only extracorporeal shock wave therapy MD -0.97 (CI: -1.13, -0.81)/MD -2.49 (CI: -3.17, -1.82) was effective for improving pain when compared to the control.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the available studies, this systematic review and meta-analysis showed that different therapeutic interventions seem to be useful strategies for improving pain in patients with plantar fasciitis. In the medium and long term, only extracorporeal shock wave therapy was effective in improving pain when compared to the control.

Corticosteroid injection for plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Corticosteroid injection is frequently used for plantar heel pain (plantar fasciitis), although there is limited high-quality evidence to support this treatment. Therefore, this study reviewed randomised trials to estimate the effectiveness of corticosteroid injection for plantar heel pain.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials that compared corticosteroid injection to any comparator. Primary outcomes were pain and function, categorised as short (0 to 6 weeks), medium (7 to 12 weeks) or longer term (13 to 52 weeks).

Results

A total of 47 trials (2989 participants) were included. For reducing pain in the short term, corticosteroid injection was more effective than autologous blood injection (SMD -0.56; 95% CI, − 0.86 to − 0.26) and foot orthoses (SMD -0.91; 95% CI, − 1.69 to − 0.13). There were no significant findings in the medium term. In the longer term, corticosteroid injection was less effective than dry needling (SMD 1.45; 95% CI, 0.70 to 2.19) and platelet-rich plasma injection (SMD 0.61; 95% CI, 0.16 to 1.06). Notably, corticosteroid injection was found to have similar effectiveness to placebo injection for reducing pain in the short (SMD -0.98; 95% CI, − 2.06, 0.11) and medium terms (SMD -0.86; 95% CI, − 1.90 to 0.19). For improving function, corticosteroid injection was more effective than physical therapy in the short term (SMD -0.69; 95% CI, − 1.31 to − 0.07). When trials considered to have high risk of bias were excluded, there were no significant findings.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of this review, corticosteroid injection is more effective than some comparators for the reduction of pain and the improvement of function in people with plantar heel pain. However, corticosteroid injection is not more effective than placebo injection for reducing pain or improving function. Further trials that are of low risk of bias will strengthen this evidence.

Registration

PROSPERO registration number CRD42016053216.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-019-2749-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Corticosteroid injection is the best treatment in plantar fasciitis if combined with controlled training

PURPOSE

Plantar fasciitis is a very common (lifetime incidence ~ 10%) and long-lasting injury with major impact on daily function. Combining corticosteroid injection and physical training (strength training and stretching) was hypothesized to result in a superior effect compared to each treatment separately.

METHODS

A single blinded randomized controlled superiority trial conducted in 2013-2014 with a 2-year follow-up (end Sept 2016). 123 consecutive patients (20-65 years) referred to two study centers in Denmark: Institute of Sports Medicine, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen and a private rheumatology clinic with symptoms of plantar fasciitis, and ultrasound measured thickness above 4.0 mm were invited. 25 did not fulfill the inclusion criteria (mainly ultrasound criteria) and 8 refused participation. 90 patients were randomized (pulling sealed envelopes) to 3 groups: (1) 3 months strength training and stretching (n = 30), (2) corticosteroid injections with monthly intervals until thickness < 4.0 mm (maximum 3 injections) (n = 31), (3) combination of the two treatments (n = 29). During the 3 months intervention period load reduction was recommended (cushioning shoes and insoles and abstaining from running and jumping). The main outcome was improvement in Pain at function on a 100-mm VAS score and in Foot Function Index (FFI, range 0-230) at 6 months (Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01994759).

RESULTS

All groups improved significantly over time, but the combination of corticosteroid injection and training (strength training and stretching) had a superior effect at all time points. The mean difference between the combined treatment and training was 40 points in FFI (95% confidence interval (CI) 63-17 points, p < 0.001) and 20 mm for VAS function pain (CI 35-5 mm, p < 0.01). The mean difference between the combined treatment and corticosteroid injections only was 29 points in FFI (CI 52-7 points, p < 0.01) and 17 mm for VAS function pain (CI 32-2 mm, p < 0.05). All differences were clinically relevant.

CONCLUSION

The best treatment for plantar fasciitis is the combination of corticosteroid injections and training (strength training and stretching). This combined treatment is superior both in the short- and in the longterm. Corticosteroid injections combined with controlled training are recommended as first line treatment in patients with plantar fasciitis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Comparative effectiveness of treatment options for plantar heel pain: a systematic review with network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of current treatment options for plantar heel pain (PHP).

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PEDro, Cochrane Database, Web of Science and WHO Clinical Trials Platform were searched from their inception until January 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with PHP investigating common treatments (ie, corticosteroid injection, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, therapeutic exercise, orthoses and/or extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT)) compared with each other or a no treatment, placebo/sham control.

DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted and checked for accuracy and completeness by pairs of reviewers. Primary outcomes were pain and function. Comparative treatment effects were analysed by random effects NMA in the short term, medium term and long term. Relative ranking of treatments was assessed by surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities (0-100 scale).

RESULTS

Thirty-one RCTs (total n=2450 patients) were included. There was no evidence of inconsistency detected between direct and indirect treatment comparisons in the networks, but sparse data led to frequently wide CIs. Available evidence does not suggest that any of the commonly used treatments for the management of PHP are better than any other, although corticosteroid injections, alone or in combination with exercise, and ESWT were ranked most likely to be effective for the management of short-term, medium-term and long-term pain or function; placebo/sham/control appeared least likely to be effective; and exercise appeared to only be beneficial for long-term pain or function.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is equivocal regarding which treatment is the most effective for the management of PHP. Given limited understanding of long-term effects, there is need for large, methodologically robust multicentre RCTs investigating and directly comparing commonly used treatments for the management of PHP.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016046963.

Minimally invasive non-surgical management of plantar fasciitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive non-surgical techniques have been widely used worldwide to treat musculoskeletal injuries. Of these techniques, injectable pharmaceutical agents are the most commonly employed treatments, with corticosteroids being the most widely used drugs. The aim of this article is to review current scientific evidence as well as the effectiveness of minimally invasive non-surgical techniques, either alone or combined, for the treatment of plantar fasciitis.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted from April 2016 until March 2017, in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement and was registered with PROSPERO. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adult patients diagnosed with plantar fasciitis were included as well as intervention studies, with a minimal sample size of 20 subjects per study (10 per group). Assessment of study eligibility was developed by three reviewers independently in an unblinded standardized manner. The physiotherapy evidence database (PEDro) scale was used to analyse the methodological quality of studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine full-text articles on minimally invasive techniques were reviewed. These articles focused on corticosteroid injections, platelet-rich plasma, Botox, dextrose injections, as well as comparative studies with dry needling vs sham needling.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of plantar fasciitis has dramatically improved in the past decade with minimally invasive techniques becoming increasingly available. Research findings have shown that the long term effects of minimally invasive (non-surgical) treatments such as shock wave therapy, botulinum toxin type-A injections, platelet-rich plasma injections and intratissue percutaneous electrolysis dry needling show similar and sometimes better results when compared to only corticosteroid injections. The latter have been the mainstay of treatment for many years despite their associated side effects both locally and systemically. To date, there is no definitive treatment guideline for plantar fasciitis, however the findings of this literature review may help inform practitioners and clinicians who use invasive methods for the treatment of plantar fasciitis regarding the levels of evidence for the different treatment modalities available.

Magnetic resonance imaging findings of chronic plantar fasciitis before and after extracorporeal shock wave therapy

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study is to examine the relationships between treatment outcome and changes in magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings after extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for chronic plantar fasciitis.

METHODS

The subjects were 23 feet of 23 patients of refractory plantar fasciitis. The mean age was 53.7 years. The thickness of the plantar fascia (PF) and findings of a high-signal intensity area (HSIA) inside the PF, edema around the PF, and bone marrow edema (BME) of the calcaneus were investigated on MR images. The Japanese Society for Surgery of the Foot (JSSF) ankle-hindfoot scale and a visual analogue scale (VAS) were used. Correlations between an improvement in symptoms and one in the MRI findings were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean thickness of the PF was 4.4±1.6mm before ESWT and 4.6±1.8mm six months after ESWT. After ESWT, there was a decrease in the numbers of feet showing HSIA inside the PF from 15 to 6, in edema around the PF from 16 to 2, and in BME of the calcaneus from 11 to 4. Clinical outcomes improved with ESWT from 70.3±5.5 to 88.6±9.1 points (JSSF), 74.1±25.3 to 28.5±24.4 points (VAS), respectively. Improvements in symptoms according to the JSSF and VAS scores and improvement in edema around the PF on MR images showed a significant correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

Edema around the PF improved significantly in association with an improvement in symptoms after ESWT.

Injected corticosteroids for treating plantar heel pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Plantar heel pain, commonly resulting from plantar fasciitis, often results in significant morbidity. Treatment options include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), orthoses, physical therapy, physical agents (e.g. extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), laser) and invasive procedures including steroid injections.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of injected corticosteroids for treating plantar heel pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, clinical trials registries and conference proceedings. Latest search: 27 March 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of corticosteroid injections in the treatment of plantar heel pain in adults were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcome measures. We used a fixed-effect model unless heterogeneity was significant, when a random-effects model was considered. We assessed the overall quality of evidence for individual outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 39 studies (36 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 3 quasi-RCTs) that involved a total of 2492 adults. Most studies were small (median = 59 participants). Participants' mean ages ranged from 34 years to 59 years. When reported, most participants had heel pain for several months. The trials were usually conducted in outpatient specialty clinics of tertiary care hospitals in 17 countries. Steroid injection was given with a local anaesthetic agent in 34 trials. Follow-up was from one month to over two years. With one exception, trials were assessed at high risk of bias in one or more domains, mostly relating to lack of blinding, including lack of confirmation of allocation concealment. With two exceptions, we rated the available evidence as very low quality, implying in each case that we are 'very uncertain about the estimate'.The 39 trials covered 18 comparisons, with six of the seven trials with three or four groups providing evidence towards two comparisons.Eight trials (724 participants) compared steroid injection versus placebo or no treatment. Steroid injection may lead to lower heel pain visual analogue scores (VAS) (0 to 100; higher scores = worse pain) in the short-term (< 1 month) (MD -6.38, 95% CI -11.13 to -1.64; 350 participants; 5 studies; I² = 65%; low quality evidence). Based on a minimal clinically significant difference (MCID) of 8 for average heel pain, the 95% CI includes a marginal clinical benefit. This potential benefit was diminished when data were restricted to three placebo-controlled trials. Steroid injection made no difference to average heel pain in the medium-term (1 to 6 months follow-up) (MD -3.47, 95% CI -8.43 to 1.48; 382 participants; 6 studies; I² = 40%; low quality evidence). There was very low quality evidence for no effect on function in the medium-term and for an absence of serious adverse events (219 participants, 4 studies). No studies reported on other adverse events, such as post-injection pain, and on return to previous activity. There was very low quality evidence for fewer treatment failures (defined variously as persistent heel pain at 8 weeks, steroid injection at 12 weeks, and unrelieved pain at 6 months) after steroid injection.The available evidence for other comparisons was rated as very low quality. We are therefore very uncertain of the estimates for the relative effects on people with heel pain of steroids compared with other interventions in:1. Tibial nerve block with anaesthetic (2 trials); orthoses (4 trials); oral NSAIDs (2 trials); and intensive physiotherapy (1 trial).2. Physical modalities: ESWT (5 trials); laser (2 trials); and radiation therapy (1 trial).3. Other invasive procedures: locally injectable NSAID (1 trial); platelet-rich plasma injections (5 trials); autologous blood injections (2 trials); botulinum toxin injections (2 trials); cryopreserved human amniotic membrane injection (1 trial); localised peppering with a needle (1 trial); dry needling (1 trial); and mini scalpel needle release (1 trial).We are also uncertain about the estimates from trials testing different techniques of local steroid injection: ultrasonography-guided versus palpation-guided (5 trials); and scintigraphy-guided versus palpation-guided (1 trial).An exploratory analysis involving pooling data from 21 trials reporting on adverse events revealed two ruptures of plantar fascia (reported in 1 trial) and three injection site infections (reported in 2 trials) in 699 participants allocated to steroid injection study arms. Five trials reported a total of 27 participants with less serious short-term adverse events in the 699 participants allocated steroid injection study arms. Reported treatments were analgesia, ice or both. Given the high risk of selective reporting for these outcomes and imprecision, this evidence was rated at very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low quality evidence that local steroid injections compared with placebo or no treatment may slightly reduce heel pain up to one month but not subsequently. The available evidence for other outcomes of this comparison was very low quality. Where available, the evidence from comparisons of steroid injections with other interventions used to treat heel pain and of different methods of guiding the injection was also very low quality. Although serious adverse events relating to steroid injection were rare, these were under-reported and a higher risk cannot be ruled out.Further research should focus on establishing the effects (benefits and harms) of injected steroids compared with placebo in typical clinical settings, subsequent to a course of unsuccessful conservative therapy. Ideally, this should be preceded by research, including patient involvement, aimed to obtain consensus on the priority questions for treating plantar heel pain.

The effectiveness of corticosteroid injection in the treatment of plantar fasciitis

Plantar fasciitis is a common cause of heel pain in adults. Although it is usually a self-limiting condition, the pain may become prolonged and severe enough to cause significant distress and disruption to the patient's daily activities and work. PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and a total of ten RCTs were selected for evaluation. These RCTs involved the use of either palpation- or ultrasonography-guided corticosteroid injections in patients diagnosed with plantar fasciitis. All placebo-controlled RCTs showed a significant reduction in pain with the use of corticosteroid injections. Some studies also showed that corticosteroid injections yielded better results than other treatment modalities. However, it is evident from these studies that the effects of corticosteroid injections are usually short-term, lasting 4-12 weeks in duration. Complications such as plantar fascia rupture are uncommon, but physicians need to weigh the treatment benefits against such risks.

Correlation between the outcome of extracorporeal shockwave therapy and pretreatment MRI findings for chronic plantar fasciitis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings before extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) and the treatment outcome of ESWT.

METHODS

This study examined 50 feet with chronic plantar fasciitis. The scores before ESWT and after a six-month follow-up were investigated using the Japanese Society for Surgery of the Foot (JSSF) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). MRI before ESWT was used for image evaluation. MRI revealed thickening of the plantar fascia (PF), and an investigation was conducted regarding the findings of a high-signal-intensity area (HSIA) inside the PF, edema near the PF, and bone marrow edema (BME) of the calcaneus.

RESULTS

The average JSSF score and VAS score improved significantly at follow-up. In total, 44 feet were noted in the improved group. MRI revealed that the average amounts of PF thickening did not significantly differ between the improved group and the non-improved group. HSIA, edema near the PF, and BME were observed in 36, 41, and 11 feet in the improved group, respectively; and 2, 4, and 2 feet in the non-improved group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

An HSIA in the PF predicted symptom improvement more easily than other MRI findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.